CORCUERA, REYVEL S.
GE-ELEC 2 Technopreneurship
ARCHI-5A (2019300026) Mr. Dennis M. Santos
Activity 06
Choose 3 articles from the listed IP Laws. Interpret and cite actual court cases in relation
to the said articles.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS
1. Republic Act No. 166, enacted on June 20, 1947, is an act that provides for the
registration and protection of trademarks, tradenames, and service marks in the
Philippines. It defines unfair competition and false marking and provides remedies against
these practices. The law also transferred the powers, duties, and functions related to the
registration of trademarks from the Bureau of Commerce to the Patent Office.
Court Case: Shangri-La International Hotel Management Ltd. v. Developers Group, Inc.
(G.R. No. 159938, March 31, 2006)
The case Shangri-La International Hotel Management Ltd. v. Developers Group, Inc. (G.R.
No. 159938, March 31, 2006) involved a trademark infringement dispute over the "Shangri
La" mark and the "S" logo. Developers Group of Companies, Inc. (DGCI) claimed
ownership of the mark and logo, having registered them with the Bureau of Patents,
Trademarks, and Technology Transfer in 1982. Shangri-La International Hotel
Management Ltd. and related entities contested this, arguing that they had been using
the mark and logo globally since 1962. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Shangri-La,
setting aside the decisions of the lower courts and dismissing DGCI's complaint for
infringement. The court emphasized the importance of the territoriality principle in
trademark law, which requires actual commercial use of trademarks within the Philippines
for registration.
2. Article 178, Moral Rights of Authors Interpretation: This article protects the moral rights
of authors, ensuring that their works are respected and their names associated with their
creations. It includes the right to attribution and the right to object to any distortion,
mutilation, or modification of their work that could harm their honor or reputation.
Court Case: G.R. No. 169155 - Joaquin v. Drilon (2008) In this case, Nick Joaquin, a
National Artist for Literature, sought to prevent unauthorized adaptations of his works,
arguing that such adaptations distorted his original intent and harmed his reputation. The
court upheld Joaquin's moral rights, emphasizing the importance of protecting the
personal and reputational interests of authors.
3. Presidential Decree No. 49, issued on November 14, 1972, aimed to modernize and
strengthen intellectual property protection in the Philippines. Enacted under President
Ferdinand Marcos, it addresses advancements in science and technology by offering
legal protection for various forms of intellectual property, such as books, art, music,
software, and films. The decree grants creators an exclusive right over their works,
allowing them to control reproduction, distribution, and derivative works. The protection
lasts for the creator's lifetime plus 50 years for most works, and 25 years for applied art and
photographs. It also includes fair use provisions, permitting limited use of copyrighted
material for criticism, news, teaching, and research. Additionally, the decree empowers
the government to act against IP infringement, ensuring creators are recognized and
compensated, and promoting fair competition and innovation.
Republic of the Philippines, through the Philippine National Police (PNP), Petitioner vs.
Heirs of Jose C. Tupaz (G.R. No. 197335) The case revolved around the copyright of the
designs for the PNP cap device and badge. In 1996, the PNP Directorate for Logistics
Support Service authorized the procurement of new uniforms and equipment, including
new cap devices and badges. The designs were created in collaboration with Jose C.
Tupaz, IV, who volunteered his services. The PNP later discovered that the heirs of Tupaz
had registered the copyright for these designs. The main legal question was whether the
copyright of a derivative work belongs to the person who fixes an idea into a tangible
medium of expression. The Supreme Court ruled that the copyright law only protects the
expression of an idea, not the idea itself. Therefore, one who merely contributes concepts
or ideas is not deemed an author. The court ordered the cancellation of the certificates
of copyright registration held by the heirs of Tupaz.
